That's good to hear! Also you can still enable it! You just have to open an E10s tab manually. If you're on windows make sure the menu bar is active, then go File > New e10s window

Well, yes I knew that but you can just imagine that I have hundreds of tabs opened right now and those won't use the E10 mechanism since they disabled the effect of browser.tabs.remote.autostart!

Ah right fair enough! Yes that does seem like a PITA!

Quote:

Originally Posted by malcomX

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrAlex

Not sure at all. Can't find anything in their blog posts.

Quote:

Something is definitely wrong! Could you try the latest version? Everything should be up to scratch.
Latest build should've fixed the latest performance issues. Let me know

Yes something definitely doesn't seem right. I'm trying to reproduce the issues but struggling to do so. Does seem like an issue due to lack of jemalloc in Waterfox. What are your system specs by chance?

I need opinions and it's been a bit since I started a flame war. What's the general consensus on Pale Moon vs Waterfox? I've been running Pale Moon since earlier this week and have been quite satisfied with it. Is it even worth it to download Waterfox to try because they're practically identical, or is Waterfox objectively better in every way, or...?

I need opinions and it's been a bit since I started a flame war. What's the general consensus on Pale Moon vs Waterfox? I've been running Pale Moon since earlier this week and have been quite satisfied with it. Is it even worth it to download Waterfox to try because they're practically identical, or is Waterfox objectively better in every way, or...?

The main purpose of Pale Moon is for people who want a Firefox-like experience without Australis and don't really care for the new feature sets.

Waterfox is for those who don't mind Australis and want a 64-bit browser with the Firefox feature set.

In particular, Pale Moon is now truly forked off with its own GUID separate from Firefox's, so if you care about 100% compatibility of your browser with all extensions you will want to use Waterfox.

Ah I see you've got a fair bit of RAM! How much is Waterfox taking up in 33.0.2?

yes alex

new profile no addon waterfox start 189,000k on waterfox home page the one with the logo on it in 1 hour of no use it in task manager be 623,000k with no use in 2 hour it over 1gb if i try
to use it with from no use waterfox shutter when page loads everything jerky when navigating. now new profile no addon restore my tabs session from other profile 182 tabs waterfox use 2.3gb ram
total in about:memory but in task manager is using 5gb.

it randomly cashes to desktop waterfox just close with no session restore or error report. if on new profile with restore my tabs session from other profile 182 tabs then no use waterfox in 1 hour if not crash to desktop it use 9gb the webgl crash version is fine no issue and faster it just crash with webgl. but it has random window hang like others firefox does it too then the browser breask from window and everything goes white make small window visit page https://www.mozilla.org/fr/firefox/desktop/customize/ then when hang make large window very bad i have had waterfox to 18gb ram it not crash but was not usable i hope help and you fix soon thanks alex

The main purpose of Pale Moon is for people who want a Firefox-like experience without Australis and don't really care for the new feature sets.

Waterfox is for those who don't mind Australis and want a 64-bit browser with the Firefox feature set.

In particular, Pale Moon is now truly forked off with its own GUID separate from Firefox's, so if you care about 100% compatibility of your browser with all extensions you will want to use Waterfox.

yes i choose use waterfox because palemoon it broken and not get security fix from mozilla i not like australis i use classic theme restore but not use palemoon because security waterfox is now my default

I need opinions and it's been a bit since I started a flame war. What's the general consensus on Pale Moon vs Waterfox? I've been running Pale Moon since earlier this week and have been quite satisfied with it. Is it even worth it to download Waterfox to try because they're practically identical, or is Waterfox objectively better in every way, or...?

Don't worry, we're all friends here . PaleMoon has become its own beast really. Plus the whole point of Waterfox is to be the fastest 64-Bit variant of Firefox. That's why builds take so long, because I've got to patch Firefox to make sure Intel's C++ compiler works properly. But the advantage are some nice performance gains over what Firefox offer, and most likely Palemoon as I'm not sure if it includes the newest performance upgrades since last I checked it used an ESR as a base. Up to you what you like really!

Quote:

Originally Posted by WetLook

MrAlex,

First off thanks for all your time, hard work and help with the Waterfox browser.
I know you put in a lot of time working on this project.

I just installed WF Ver. 33.0.2 and so far have had no problems.

I see listed under “Tools” “Add-ons” there is “OpenH264 Video Codec provided by Cisco Systems, Inc.”

I also see a message above this add-on that reads “Will be installed shortly.” suggesting that it will be downloaded and installed.

Is this add-on installed correctly, having the “Will be installed shortly.” message?

Again Thanks & Stay Safe.

No worries, glad you like to use Waterfox! Hmmm not sure about that, I'll have a look. Doesn't really matter anyway as H264 works just fine and was more of a licensing issue for Mozilla.

Quote:

Originally Posted by malcomX

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrAlex

Ah right fair enough! Yes that does seem like a PITA!

Ah I see you've got a fair bit of RAM! How much is Waterfox taking up in 33.0.2?

yes alex

new profile no addon waterfox start 189,000k on waterfox home page the one with the logo on it in 1 hour of no use it in task manager be 623,000k with no use in 2 hour it over 1gb if i try
to use it with from no use waterfox shutter when page loads everything jerky when navigating. now new profile no addon restore my tabs session from other profile 182 tabs waterfox use 2.3gb ram
total in about:memory but in task manager is using 5gb.

it randomly cashes to desktop waterfox just close with no session restore or error report. if on new profile with restore my tabs session from other profile 182 tabs then no use waterfox in 1 hour if not crash to desktop it use 9gb the webgl crash version is fine no issue and faster it just crash with webgl. but it has random window hang like others firefox does it too then the browser breask from window and everything goes white make small window visit page https://www.mozilla.org/fr/firefox/desktop/customize/ then when hang make large window very bad i have had waterfox to 18gb ram it not crash but was not usable i hope help and you fix soon thanks alex

Hmm the memory usage is definitely correct for the amount of RAM you have, but it definitely shouldn't crash. And you say there's no crash report? Even on 33.0.2 because I re-enabled the crash reporter? Very strange, I'll see what I can find out for you!

Isn't the latest version of WF seem to be having some memory leaks? I have a lot of tabs but not enough to warrant around 2GB of RAM! I noticed that earlier when it was sluggish i was browsing with it for some reason.

Isn't the latest version of WF seem to be having some memory leaks? I have a lot of tabs but not enough to warrant around 2GB of RAM! I noticed that earlier when it was sluggish i was browsing with it for some reason.

With 25 tabs open (and some of the pages are rather image intensive), Adblock Plus, etc. WaterFox is using just over 1GB RAM for me, which is around what it normally has been in this situation for me.

A 64bit program is always going to use more memory than a 32bit equivalent, I've had WaterFox using way more than 2GB RAM in normal use before. 2GB RAM being used doesn't seem wrong at all to me.